Bug#251953: gnome-settings-daemon not in default PATH

[Marcelo E. Magallon]

Hi,

 since you insist there's something of substance in this post I'll reply
 to it.  I state upfront that you utterly ignored the reported bug.

 > In simple words you can find here what is the goal of the gnome
 > config system : http://developer.gnome.org/arch/gnome/misc/ So,
 > gnome-settings-daemon is designed "for GNOME programs".

 Which is the way I'm using it.  I'm not trying to thwack non-GNOME
 programs into using gnome-settings-daemon, am I?

 > GNOME is designed to be a complete desktop avec pieces are not meant
 > to be used in another projects.

 Just for the record, what you tried to write was "even if pieces are
 meant to be used by other projects".  Or at least that's what I guess
 that you tried to write, because what you wrote doesn't make sense.

 > So if you want it to work in another manner, do work your scripts to
 > adapt with the existing architecture, or suggest the upstream authors
 > to change their mind.

 Which is what I'm doing.  Newsflash: we accept bugs that are upstream
 bugs and we forward them.  We also work around them if it need be.  I
 know that Christian used to close them, but I hope that custom didn't
 stick, because that is _not_ the way we are supposed to work.

 > Moreover, http://www.gnome.org/projects/epiphany/ says : "The web
 > browser for the GNOME Desktop" So it is by goal especially designed
 > for GNOME and no other environment.

 Yes, it is.  I fail to see your (technical or otherwise) point.

 Care to tell me in which way exactly am I _not_ running GNOME?  Or to
 put it in another way: what do I _have_ to run to be "running GNOME"?

 I have asked this already, and you people didn't bother to answer.

 > So, this is NOT a bug, this is wanted by design, and this program IS
 > NOT meant to be launched by users, it is meant to be launched in a
 > session.

 By design... why?  What does the design say?  Because I'll be _glad_ to
 read that.

 FWIW, looking at the X Session Management Protocol (which is what
 _defines_ a session in the sense that you are using it), this program
 doesn't really have anything to do with a session.  The fact that
 gnome-session starts it (because it's part of the _GNOME architecture_
 -- a very different can of worms) doesn't confer it magical powers.
 It's still the same program running in the _exact_ _same_ way that I'm
 running it right now.  Now, if you were so kind to point the flaw in
 what I just wrote, I'll be more than happy to read.

 > >> I'm changing the severity to normal.
 > >
 > > No, you are not.
 > 
 > So, now, please chg your tone

 Pal, you are reading way too much in "no, you are not".  I'm sure the
 Spring weather in France is very nice right now, take advantage of it:
 go out and chill off.

 And the rest of the text you wrote and that I deleted doesn't contain
 one iota of something that could pass as the shadow of a
 counterargument, least to say a real one, and don't even mention a
 technical one.  The rest is in fact a bunch of uncalled for treats
 (silly ones, I give you that) and things that aren't even on topic.

 Marcelo